Subject: RE: [Sipping] I-DACTION:draft-sawada-sipping-sip-offeranswer-01.txt: SDPsess-version

From: "Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:53:22 +0200

Hi, 

>>In another e-mail I talked about the possibility to use the SDP
>>sess-version (part of the o= line) to reject an offer, by not
>>increasing the sess-version value in the answer, but that is a
>>separate discussion.
>>
>That isn't rejecting the offer, though, that's providing the previous
answer as the answer to the new offer.  It does 
>seem that if the previous answer is also a valid answer for the new
offer, it's allowed to do that.

What I proposed was actually the value would be DECREASED in this case.
But, please see separate thread on that.

Regards,

Christer

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments of core SIP

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 10:31:10 -0400

From: "Christer Holmberg \(JO/LMF\)" <[email-masked]>

"not increasing" and "decreasing" are different.

But on what grounds would decreasing the version be considered
acceptable?  And why would you want to, since there are already a host
of 4xx codes for rejecting a re-INVITE?

Dale